A Tennis Hypothetical (would this player be GOAT?)

After a juniors career where he blew everyone off the court he wins his first major at the AO in 2019

Then he gets on the sickest, hottest streak ever and also reels off the next 7 majors for a double consecutive Calendar Year Slam. In a few of those tournaments he never drops serve.

In addition he wins a significant number of the masters in those two years, and wins the 2020 Olympic Gold. he also wins the WTF both seasons.

The era before he started winning was considered medium strong (there were a few multi-slam winners in near-prime form on tour)

Then his private jet crashes on the way to the 2021 AO and he tragically dies.

Prior to this somewhere around his 5th or 6th consecutive majors people were wondering if we were witnessing a new GOAT. This player was lethal on all surfaces equally.

So he ends his life with "only" 8 majors, a gold, a WTF, "only" 100 weeks at #1.

But he'd blown EVERY one of his peers off the court for 2 straight years, passed the eyeball test of just looking the part of the perfect game, had a positive H2H against every opponent he'd played more than twice.

Could this player be a GOAT without surpassing any of the grand slam champions?

This is your answer. I had to google her. So no, this person would never be considered the greatest in history. Though he would not quickly be forgotten, if at all, tennis is about what you achieve mostly. Not about how, or when, or in which time. That's why I also never get the thing where people say someone should retire to 'protect his legacy'.

interesting, had never heard of maureen connolly. She had a pretty sick run.

I can't help but think that the theoretical person I'm talking about though in the modern era would by hyped up a lot more, would have a lot more video around to prove their dominance, etc.

However, I also suppose you could compare this person to Monica Seles since he career was rocking before the stab job.

I guess what i'm talking about though is absolute dominance to the highest order... no one was touching this guy... and in an era where everyone has the same access to top rate coaching, conditioning, equipment, etc.

This is your answer. I had to google her. So no, this person would never be considered the greatest in history. Though he would not quickly be forgotten, if at all, tennis is about what you achieve mostly. Not about how, or when, or in which time. That's why I also never get the thing where people say someone should retire to 'protect his legacy'.

Click to expand...

:shock: you seriously never heard of maureen 'little mo' connolly..the horse riding accident that ended her career when she was hoovering up majors for a laugh...is a big a 'what if' as seles and what wouldve happened if not been stabbed.

:shock: you seriously never heard of maureen 'little mo' connolly..the horse riding accident that ended her career when she was hoovering up majors for a laugh...is a big a 'what if' as seles and what wouldve happened if not been stabbed.

Click to expand...

No. I've never heard of her, and never seen her in any goat debate. I wiki'd here and know what you talk about. It says something that me, a non-american, but way more than casual fan of tennis, don't know who she is.

That tells you that in history, what ifs are important, but not as important as people who actually did what they were destined to do, as opposed to people who never got the chance.

I'd say that on paper a player like this would definitely be one of the all time greats with a strong argument for being the greatest ever. He'd be in the running though, as would several other players. How much did the player impact professional tennis though? How influential was he in terms of affecting those that followed? These things are also factors in my view. To be one of the greatest players ever, with as many great tennis players as there has been, requires more than a large number of titles and records. The greatest players leave a mark that transcends the game and influences generations that follow them.

I'd say that on paper a player like this would definitely be one of the all time greats with a strong argument for being the greatest ever. He'd be in the running though, as would several other players. How much did the player impact professional tennis though? How influential was he in terms of affecting those that followed? These things are also factors in my view. To be one of the greatest players ever, with as many great tennis players as there has been, requires more than a large number of titles and records. The greatest players leave a mark that transcends the game and influences generations that follow them.

Click to expand...

Some say he impacted it positively because he was a great role model and excellent for the sport. He was every bit the media and commercial success that Federer is.

However some say he impacted it negatively because he was so dominant that it left little intrigue in the match.

He was so dominant without dropping sets and consistently bageling, breadsticking, and golden setting people that he never had any signature legendary 5 set matches, or any type of a real rival.

IN fact, on internet tennis message boards, people were beginning to wonder whether the player was actually brilliant or if the era was unbelievably weak.

Going into the 2021 AO there was little hope for anyone else to win, if you wanted to bet on him it was 1/5 that he would win the title. 2/1 that he'd win it without dropping a set.

If he had a real mark it was that every time he changed surfaces, he changed his game just a little to optimize on that surface.

interesting, had never heard of maureen connolly. She had a pretty sick run.

I can't help but think that the theoretical person I'm talking about though in the modern era would by hyped up a lot more, would have a lot more video around to prove their dominance, etc.

However, I also suppose you could compare this person to Monica Seles since he career was rocking before the stab job.

I guess what i'm talking about though is absolute dominance to the highest order... no one was touching this guy... and in an era where everyone has the same access to top rate coaching, conditioning, equipment, etc.

Click to expand...

Monica Seles (circa 1989-1993) had the nickname "Little Mo" as well, just like Maureen Connolly.

Some say he impacted it positively because he was a great role model and excellent for the sport. He was every bit the media and commercial success that Federer is.

However some say he impacted it negatively because he was so dominant that it left little intrigue in the match.

He was so dominant without dropping sets and consistently bageling, breadsticking, and golden setting people that he never had any signature legendary 5 set matches, or any type of a real rival.

IN fact, on internet tennis message boards, people were beginning to wonder whether the player was actually brilliant or if the era was unbelievably weak.

Going into the 2021 AO there was little hope for anyone else to win, if you wanted to bet on him it was 1/5 that he would win the title. 2/1 that he'd win it without dropping a set.

If he had a real mark it was that every time he changed surfaces, he changed his game just a little to optimize on that surface.

But really his trademark was the absolute blowouts

Click to expand...

Many weigh a high level of play heavily when considering great players. To exand on this, did players try and emulate the style of play he adopted? Did they try and behave the way he did during matches (on court demeanor)? Did they adopt many of his training methods off court? In those ways, a great player could leave a brilliant legacy for those that followed. I think that the hypothetical player you describe would definitely be in the conversation, especially since there tends to be a modern bias. If a player accomplished that much by 2021, many fans at that time would be absolutely convinced that he would crush Federer, Nadal, or any player before him, because of the natural "evolution" of tennis. I doubt that I would agree with that even by then, but that tends to occur during every era. If that happened, guess what? The Nadal and Federer fans of today would be making the very same arguments that posters in the Former Pro Player Talk section make today wouldn't they?

When Sampras won his 13th and 14th majors, I don't think Sampras thought that any player would get near those totals for decades, especially as the 1998-2003 period had a load of different major winners.

He'd have a really good case. As Mustard said, tennis history is very complicated, and picking a definitive GOAT is next to impossible. But this hypothetical guy would be up there for sure, having achieved in two years more than 99% of players achieve in their entire career.

No. I've never heard of her, and never seen her in any goat debate. I wiki'd here and know what you talk about. It says something that me, a non-american, but way more than casual fan of tennis, don't know who she is.

That tells you that in history, what ifs are important, but not as important as people who actually did what they were destined to do, as opposed to people who never got the chance.

Click to expand...

she played in 11 majors and winning 9 of them and those 9 were won in consecutive majors she entered..

saying you've not heard of little mo connolly is like you havnt heard of monica seles or tracy austin...as you say you are a casual fan, thats fair enough....

anyway, now you know, so its no big deal its a big shame how her career was ended age about 20 i think, and then she died of cancer in the 1960s aged around 35 :sad:

In men's tennis anyone anyone who can win 2 grand slams (the real not - no this bs career slam business) and Olympic gold - Is GOAT. A golden Slam is even better. I believe Rod Laver won 2 Grand slams (but a lot tournaments were grass).

Women's - I guess you have to beat Steffi Graf's or Margret Courts - records - not really sure what they are.

This person would definitely be up for the GOAT position, and won't be forgotten easily. Back to back CYGSs will be something to remember, but then again you have the story of Ms. Connolly.

In the future, after this hypothetical player has died, I feel a majority of people will judge by what this player had done, instead of what this player could have done. It's sort of like a Bjorn Borg like way of judging things.

This player would be up there for achievements GOATs, and probably top for potential GOAT discussions.

In men's tennis anyone anyone who can win 2 grand slams (the real not - no this bs career slam business) and Olympic gold - Is GOAT. A golden Slam is even better. I believe Rod Laver won 2 Grand slams (but a lot tournaments were grass).

Women's - I guess you have to beat Steffi Graf's or Margret Courts - records - not really sure what they are.

Click to expand...

Laver didn't have Olympic Tennis as an option, it wasn't there when he was playing.

re. Olympic Gold. I think rather the WTF. If one doesn't have the WTF on one's CV it is much more glaring than the absence of an Olympic Gold since you get 4 times the attempts to win the WTF than you do Olympic Gold, so only a 1/4 the excuses for not winning it.

In men's tennis anyone anyone who can win 2 grand slams (the real not - no this bs career slam business) and Olympic gold - Is GOAT. A golden Slam is even better. I believe Rod Laver won 2 Grand slams (but a lot tournaments were grass).

Women's - I guess you have to beat Steffi Graf's or Margret Courts - records - not really sure what they are.

It's wrong to say it means "zilch", but Laver was probably only the fourth best player in the world in 1962, behind Rosewall, Hoad and Gimeno (all professionals). Gonzales was in an 18 month retirement at the time. Laver also won the 4 biggest professional tournaments in 1967 (winning the French Pro, Wembley Pro, US Pro and Wimbledon Pro). By this point, Laver was the undisputed best player in the world.

To use a real example, but in another sport, ie the Munich air disaster that wiped out most of the Manchester United team in the 50s, it has only added to the legend of "Bubsy's Babes". They are still considered one of the best sides ever, notwithstanding their opportunities to win more trophies was tragically cut short.

Sometimes a tragedy can enhance the reputation of a person, rather than cut it short. Look at Elivis, still considered the King. Marilyn Monroe, still probably considered the greatest female entertainer of all time.

So to use the example in the OP, chances are that the player, whoever it was, may just be considered a GOAT, and there would be people of the player's era arguing with future generations just how good he was.